leagueoflegendsfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Wiki Review 4
This is the fourth wiki review. It has been 3 months since our last one and now it's that time again to come to a consensus on certain things. Please don't be afraid to leave your honest opinion. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting Featured Articles We have featured champions, but I propose we have other featured articles such as items, locations, spells, masteries, etc. By supporting this section, you are supporting adding more Featured Articles. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting will end on May 18, 2012. ;Support #Items please. 19:21, May 5, 2012 (UTC) #Yeah items Dj0z 19:40, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # 23:55, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # So long as it doesn't add clutter. --Sydeyc 01:29, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # As long as they are quality articles that showcase the effort put into this wiki. RadarMatt ( (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻) 09:16, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ;Neutral # ;Oppose # Featured articles on Wiki's are actually supposed to be about well written articles, not just ingame items people may or may not like. LionsLight 02:48, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # Cue Occam's Razor. Why do we need more featured articles? ;Comments @Lions: Please point out to me a poorly written article and a well written article on this wiki. 01:28, May 7, 2012 (UTC) : Zaun is a well written article. Well placed images and fairly good, structured writing, uses citations and links to relevant pages when needed. Jungling, on the other hand, is a complete mess in comparison with a lot of informal writing riddled with personal opinion (especially everything from Jungling#Tier list downwards) and the entire page is poorly thought from how things are left half-explained and how things like Smite are explained to the reader only after 2-3 sections referring to it. LionsLight 01:54, May 8, 2012 (UTC) ;Closing Statement * 00:53, May 19, 2012 (UTC) Chat Moderator Star I propose that we change the icon for the chat moderator star in chat. By supporting this section, you are supporting changing the Chat Moderator Star. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting will end on May 18, 2012. ;Support # As of what I saw in chat, a separated colored new icon sounds good. 18:12, May 5, 2012 (UTC) #: I propose . 19:21, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # gold for Cmod and platinum for Mod+. 20:14, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # Per my comment. 23:55, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # Ilkcs' proposed use seems good enough.--Sydeyc 01:32, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # I feel that this is needed, because some users who enter the chat asks for an admin or a moderator, and can't differentiate between a moderator/administrator from a Chat Moderator. This would be a really good change if the icon could be separated based on rights; two icons, one for Chat moderators, and one for Moderators and higher. Too many icons would probably screw the chat up. Proposition supported and agreed upon. 06:33, May 11, 2012 (UTC) ;Neutral # As long as they aren't obtrusive, I honestly don't care. LionsLight 02:48, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ;Oppose # I propose using . I feel that the summoner profile badge has minimal relevance. 22:43, May 10, 2012 (UTC) ;Comments *My proposal would be to change the stars to these icons. 18:14, May 5, 2012 (UTC) :Relevant quote from Wiki Main Page: "If anyone has a better design for the main page, sure. If not, no. I don't see the point in any of these "let's just indeterminately change this" topics. How are you supposed to decide whether we should change the main page before seeing what it would be changed to? " 22:46, May 10, 2012 (UTC) * Unfortunately, it is currently not possible to add multiple icons, however, we can still change the current star to this icon. Please re-vote if needed or leave your current vote if you still feel like we should change the star. 20:26, May 12, 2012 (UTC) :I think that the image of an is totally more relevant than a badge of takedowns/minion kills/elo, which only implies skill/commitment. 22:02, May 12, 2012 (UTC) ::I think that would be nice as well after considering Tribunal, but the reason I don't support this idea is because I don't want any commotion over Kayle being the icon and other champions not being the icon. 22:57, May 13, 2012 (UTC) ;Closing Statement * 00:53, May 19, 2012 (UTC) Personal Files I propose that we limit the amount of personal files a user can add as allowing it doesn't help the wiki and is pushing us to become a fan-site rather than an encyclopedic site. By supporting this section, you are supporting limitng the amount of Personal Files a user can add. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting will end on May 18, 2012. ;Support # ;Neutral # Would be valid. Thing is, how do we keep track of each user's file? 18:13, May 5, 2012 (UTC) ;Oppose # Deletion solves all issues. 19:21, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # IIRC we already delete personal files that aren't uploaded properly or that don't meet the wiki's policies. Don't see the need to go beyond what's already being done on this subject.--Sydeyc 01:36, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # Wikia doesn't limit our storage space. Why should we limit our userbase's use of it? As long as it doesn't violate user files policy and terms of use, whatever people upload for themselves should be fine. LionsLight 02:49, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # 23:51, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # 12:15, May 7, 2012 (UTC) # Delete when necessary. RadarMatt ( (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻) 23:36, May 8, 2012 (UTC) # ;Comments *@Leia: &prefix=Dysrhythmia&namespace=6}} ;Closing Statement * 00:53, May 19, 2012 (UTC) Message Wall The Message Wall uses a threaded conversation format and notification system that lets you control which conversations you're interested in following. By supporting this section, you are supporting enabling the Message Wall feature. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting will end on May 18, 2012. ;Support : If it's more user-friendly than the current talk page, well sure. Will the talk page still be in use though? 18:16, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # ;Neutral # I like the new wall, but I've grown to like the old one better. :\ 20:16, May 5, 2012 (UTC) ;Oppose # Nonononono. 19:21, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # NOPE. Hate the Message wall system even on articles. This change would only further turn this wiki into a forum. LionsLight 02:48, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # As wonderful as it is for newer editors/people with no editing experience, it's a hot mess, especially when it comes to viewing the history. 04:31, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # Hell no. 13:16, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # 23:51, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # 12:16, May 7, 2012 (UTC) # ;Comments * Adding the message wall, will automatically archive everyone's current talk pages and only Moderators+ will be able to edit them, but it will not send a notification for a new message. 01:39, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ;Closing Statement * 00:53, May 19, 2012 (UTC) Blogs Blogs allow users on your wiki to create their own blog posts on their profile page and can also be used to communicate news and events with the wiki community. Recently, however, most blogs aren't being made for informative purposes, they are being made for fan-fictional purposes. By supporting this section, you are supporting disabling the Blog feature. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting will end on May 18, 2012. ;Support # ;Neutral # I see where this issue comes from, but there ought to be a better solution than just removing the feature. There are still informative and useful posts being made, a good example is NeonSpotlight's chat mod policy blog.--Sydeyc 01:38, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ;Oppose # There's still many utility in blogs, a little bit wasteful to throw it away due to that. 18:22, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # What? No! 20:18, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # We still need the blogs for information. Reilock 00:05, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # Blogs are not supposed to be used for informative reasons. Why should we care about them being used for fandom purposes? LionsLight 02:48, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # 23:51, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # this comes just when i decided that blogs aren't that evil. 12:17, May 7, 2012 (UTC) ;Comments Need to find a way to change blog creation: Set to Category:Blog posts vs Category:Custom champions, because I'm a tad lazy. 19:23, May 5, 2012 (UTC) ;Closing Statement * 00:53, May 19, 2012 (UTC) Article Comments This extension will let people write comments at the bottom of article pages. Other users can reply to the comments, and signatures and timestamps are automatically assigned. This will replace talk pages on articles. By supporting this section, you are supporting disabling the Article Comments feature. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting will end on May 19, 2012. ;Support : Talk pages tend to be more forgotten than anything. Only time I've seen activity on article Talk pages is when the article is flagged for cleanup or deletion, and these can probably be discussed in a different area. --Sydeyc 01:41, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # You have a problem when stats show article comments on LoL Wikia outnumber actual mainspace edits 10:1. Disable it. If people want to use a forum, they should go on a forum. LionsLight 02:48, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ;Neutral # ;Oppose # This actually help in noticing artlcle discrephancies at times. 19:04, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # I, at one point, supported the idea of removing comments completely, but that was back when I was young and naive. I've helped hundreds, if not thousands, of LoL players via the comment section of our wiki. We have to realize that the comment section, while it has its downsides, helps out a ton of players when it comes to understanding the game or learning how to play better or just players who want someone to chat with about a champion they love. I started out on this wiki through the comment section, I've gained notoriety through the comment section, I've dedicated most of my time on the wiki to the comment section (more so, collectively, than any other user), the comment section is, in my opinion, a large feature of the wiki that not only brings in a lot of traffic but also helps out too many users for it to disappear. 04:39, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # I'd say the amount of pointless comments we get are worth it for the few that actually do help those who use the wiki. We need to remember that the wiki is here to help spread knowledge about the game and comments are a perfect venue to ask questions and have those with experience respond. With the proposal of mods and admins looking after certain pages, bad comments would be less of an issue. Also, as Neon said, comments are a good way to initiate involvement. RadarMatt ( (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻) 10:02, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # 23:51, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # Also, lol "young and naive" Neon 01:28, May 7, 2012 (UTC) # I started out on the wiki through comments. I had a lot of my questions answered and it should remain this way for other users. I don't see any harm in on-topic dicussions. --Sydeyc 04:51, May 7, 2012 (UTC) # 12:18, May 7, 2012 (UTC) # ;Comments *Your comment makes no sense at all Lions, who cares what the ratio of comments to edits are as long as our articles are up to date and accurate? The number could be 1000:1 and it still wouldn't convince me something was wrong. Disabling comments will not encourage editing, it will only cause us to lose traffic and a lot of dedicated visitors. 04:39, May 6, 2012 (UTC) : Because as a Wiki, you end up with 90% of your activity in chitchat and banter, which doesn't sound right to me, when I feel that most of a wiki community's efforts should be directed towards making a more complete repository of information. Getting visitors who are here to pretend this is a forum isn't going to matter to us one way or another with that goal in mind. : Now for a practical reason: and is in a huge mess because of the Comment Walls. People who are actually interested in monitoring them for vandals are severely restricted in their ability to do so because of how many comments they have to sift through. I might cite Bulbapedia as an example of a wiki community that actively restricted their userbase from editing their User pages for this reason; that their constant unproductive edits were flooding Recent Changes. And guess what? It worked out fine for them. In fact, it actually did get people to start actively editing pages. So I don't think my mindset is wrong in saying that the sheer activity Comment Walls get is negatively affecting our editor-base LionsLight 05:18, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ::Flooding Recent Changes isn't a valid reason, because you can exclude the talk namespace. 18:52, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ::I use three RC's: One for 100 most recent overall, one for 100 most recent non-talk, and one for 500 pure talk. This offers a nice mix between the relevant and allows me to moderate any spam/vulgarity/etc. (unless somebody mass-deletes comments) 01:28, May 7, 2012 (UTC) *One thing to consider/remember is how much backlash we got on just the Shen page when we changed a single template, almost 3000 votes from users to remove that template even though it almost "passed" a forum just like this one. Needless to say, that template is gone and no amount of support votes on the forum could've saved it. 04:47, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ;Closing Statement * 17:28, May 20, 2012 (UTC) Article Assignments NeonSpotlight proposes that we assign certain articles to our moderators and administrators to scan through article comments and clean them up. By supporting this section, you are supporting Article Assignments for moderators and administrators to scan through comments and clean the up. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting will end on May 19, 2012. ;Support # Why not? This does somewhat ensure the pages are patrolled regularly. 19:10, May 5, 2012 (UTC) #: 23:55, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # Won't be relevant if we disable article comments, but still a good idea. LionsLight 02:48, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # This sounds like a good system. RadarMatt ( (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻) 09:09, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ;Neutral # We've got about 5 active (on every day) mods+. Is this a continuous watching of new comments, or a cleansing of old? For the first, I'd say that it can be practiced by taking a good look at RC every few hours. For the second, then I doubt that we'll have much enthusiasm in spring cleaning. 01:28, May 7, 2012 (UTC) # 04:47, May 7, 2012 (UTC) ;Oppose # ;Comments *I don't mean to sound rude or anything, but the opinions of users under the moderator level will not have much weight in this decision just because of the fact it is a purely moderation based issue. 18:16, May 5, 2012 (UTC) It should be a watching of new comments but, at the same time, should mix a little cleansing of the old as you go through your designated pages. As wonderful as your RC checking is, comments still get through (lol@Teemo's page). Maybe if all of our mod+ users adopted that we wouldn't need this assigning of articles, could be a good alternative. I know we shouldn't expect enthusiasm in spring cleaning but it's something that we also have to do, but something we could just do as admins+ over time. 02:28, May 8, 2012 (UTC) ;Closing Statement * 17:28, May 20, 2012 (UTC) Wiki Logo We have had this wiki logo for a while now, and I propose that we update it. By supporting this section, you are supporting updating the Wiki Logo. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting will end on May 19, 2012. ;Support # ;Neutral # It's nice if we have a new one, but the current one matches LoL's font andn style. Kinda depends on how new ones look like. 19:12, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # As long as it's not tacky.LionsLight 02:48, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # 23:51, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # totally no opinion on the question. 12:21, May 7, 2012 (UTC) ;Oppose # Why change? It's perfect the way it is. 20:20, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # The old one looks good to me. RadarMatt ( (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻) 09:11, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # What Kitten said. 01:28, May 7, 2012 (UTC) ;Comments * File:Wiki.png (used on MonoBook, e.g. the Main Page in MonoBook) could do with some width reduction as per Help:Customizing_Monobook#Logo. --BryghtShadow 23:27, May 5, 2012 (UTC) **I like the idea of having a new logo similar to that one. 23:55, May 5, 2012 (UTC) ;Closing Statement * 17:28, May 20, 2012 (UTC) Wiki Background We have had this wiki background for a little while now, and I propose that we update it. By supporting this section, you are supporting updating the Wiki Background. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting will end on May 20, 2012. ;Support # I remember posting some potential ideas in the past. Anyway, any solid idea for this yet? 19:15, May 5, 2012 (UTC) # I like the ideas brought forth in the discussion about a possible Wiki remodel, though those images could use some touch ups in terms of colors or ensuring that we don't lose too much behind the page's main body. --Sydeyc 01:49, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # 23:51, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # Reilock 11:41, May 11, 2012 (UTC) ;Neutral # If this affects the color scheme, just remember to prioritize readability. LionsLight 02:48, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # I like the blue, though. 12:22, May 7, 2012 (UTC) # Regarding colour scheme, I have trouble distinguishing my selected text (dark blue on dark blue). This makes editing difficult. --BryghtShadow 17:58, May 8, 2012 (UTC) ;Oppose # ;Comments *What are the options for a new wiki background? Maybe link them here? RadarMatt ( (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻) 23:44, May 8, 2012 (UTC) ;Closing Statement * 17:28, May 20, 2012 (UTC) Wiki Main Page I propose that we do a complete remake of the main page. By supporting this section, you are supporting updating the Wiki Main Page. 18:00, May 5, 2012 (UTC) Voting will end on May 20, 2012. ;Support # It could use some work below the champion roster. Wikia Facebook doesn't need that much dedicated space IMO.--Sydeyc 01:47, May 6, 2012 (UTC) # 23:51, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ;Neutral # As long as it's not tacky.LionsLight 02:48, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ;Oppose # ;Comments *The topic is unclear: are you suggesting we set a regular update day for the main page, or a complete remake? 19:25, May 5, 2012 (UTC) **I changed it to make it clearer. 23:55, May 5, 2012 (UTC) *** I see... updating the main page, like so? I do it all the time. 02:02, May 6, 2012 (UTC) ****I'm just proposing we remodel the main page. 02:15, May 6, 2012 (UTC) *Where's BBilge when you need him.. HaHa! 02:39, May 8, 2012 (UTC) Now that we're clear that the issue is a remodel, we need to determine: #If the main page needs to be improved. #If yes, what needs to be changed. #How to make the change a positive one. We can't just go in saying "let's remake the page". We need a plan for what needs to be improved, and how. 01:28, May 7, 2012 (UTC) *That discussion will be taken to it's own forum after this review closes. There would be no discussion if users didn't agree with the idea in the first place. 01:54, May 7, 2012 (UTC) *If anyone has a better design for the main page, sure. If not, no. I don't see the point in any of these "let's just indeterminately change this" topics. How are you supposed to decide whether we should change the main page before seeing what it would be changed to? ;Closing Statement * 17:28, May 20, 2012 (UTC)